Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm 38 and don't understand this 100% or have firsthand experience of it. But I can read it. Am I illiterate?

You have 34 more years of life experience than a 4-year-old. You're also probably better at abstract thinking than a 4-year-old.

But if you want to think that a 4-year-old is comprehending Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, go ahead. Clearly this child will be ready for Crime and Punishment by age 5, and If This Is A Man by age 7.

I'm not the 38yo PP (I wish), but I'm perplexed that you can't believe that this is true. It is. There's a vast diversity of humans out there, and some of them are really unusual. One of mine is. Kids who are different don't deserve to have their experiences invalidated or dismissed. They're different. FWIW, I think that one reason she's like that is just genetic -- it's how my DH's parents describe him as a kid too. But part of it is she is/was SUPER inquisitive, about big, adult, philosophical and scientific topics. And we gave her real answers. We tried kid-level answers, but she wouldn't accept them and keep questioning in more and more precise ways until we couldn't blow her off. So she learned the stuff she was interested in. Now, she is absolutely not at that level in other areas (math, social). But when it comes to reading/critical thinking, she's probably ahead of most 10 year olds.
I'm not bragging, fyi. I love my other kid (who's not like this) just as much and think she's just as awesome. Of course my kids are my favorite, but I think all kids are awesome. I've worked with kids a lot, and I just really like kids. If you allow yourself to see them for who they are and not try to fit them in a box of what you think all kids are like, they are really interesting.

If your 4 year old understands suicide, it isn't because she's gifted. The best example I can give is that my child at 4 knew about monocles because we were reading a book about different eyewear. She would appear to have more knowledge than other 4 year olds about monocles at the time, not because she was gifted, but because she had learned about them whereas maybe another 4 year old had learned about eagles or turpentine or gargoyles on that particular day. Your child didn't learn about suicide because she was gifted or inquisitive any more or less than any other kid. Damn shame you feel it was appropriate because you think she was ahead of most 10 year olds. 4 year olds don't have the life experiences to understand Harry Potter. If you gave non-kid level answers about suicide/death wish - well, I got nothing. Just nothing in response.

No, a 4 year old isn't reading Harry Potter and understanding it - but you can tell yourself that. Like I said, it is like nails on a chalkboard when someone says their 4/5 year old is reading Harry Potter.

Also I'm not sure why you're so aghast that I have no kid level response re suicide. I have the response at MY kid's level. She guided me to where she was in her understanding and I answered her questions. There's nothing wrong with that. She understands it is a terrible thing and an awful mistake and waste of life that we would never do. And the people who do it have terrible problems and if she ever thought about it or felt that way to tell us. But that's really unthinkable for you I guess. It's good you're not her parent because it sounds like you would tell her to stop asking questions and that she can't read the books she wants to. Also, I love her just the way she is, so go to hell.

I would respond but you're too angry.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm 38 and don't understand this 100% or have firsthand experience of it. But I can read it. Am I illiterate?

You have 34 more years of life experience than a 4-year-old. You're also probably better at abstract thinking than a 4-year-old.

But if you want to think that a 4-year-old is comprehending Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, go ahead. Clearly this child will be ready for Crime and Punishment by age 5, and If This Is A Man by age 7.

I'm not the 38yo PP (I wish), but I'm perplexed that you can't believe that this is true. It is. There's a vast diversity of humans out there, and some of them are really unusual. One of mine is. Kids who are different don't deserve to have their experiences invalidated or dismissed. They're different. FWIW, I think that one reason she's like that is just genetic -- it's how my DH's parents describe him as a kid too. But part of it is she is/was SUPER inquisitive, about big, adult, philosophical and scientific topics. And we gave her real answers. We tried kid-level answers, but she wouldn't accept them and keep questioning in more and more precise ways until we couldn't blow her off. So she learned the stuff she was interested in. Now, she is absolutely not at that level in other areas (math, social). But when it comes to reading/critical thinking, she's probably ahead of most 10 year olds.
I'm not bragging, fyi. I love my other kid (who's not like this) just as much and think she's just as awesome. Of course my kids are my favorite, but I think all kids are awesome. I've worked with kids a lot, and I just really like kids. If you allow yourself to see them for who they are and not try to fit them in a box of what you think all kids are like, they are really interesting.

If your 4 year old understands suicide, it isn't because she's gifted. The best example I can give is that my child at 4 knew about monocles because we were reading a book about different eyewear. She would appear to have more knowledge than other 4 year olds about monocles at the time, not because she was gifted, but because she had learned about them whereas maybe another 4 year old had learned about eagles or turpentine or gargoyles on that particular day. Your child didn't learn about suicide because she was gifted or inquisitive any more or less than any other kid. Damn shame you feel it was appropriate because you think she was ahead of most 10 year olds. 4 year olds don't have the life experiences to understand Harry Potter. If you gave non-kid level answers about suicide/death wish - well, I got nothing. Just nothing in response.

No, a 4 year old isn't reading Harry Potter and understanding it - but you can tell yourself that. Like I said, it is like nails on a chalkboard when someone says their 4/5 year old is reading Harry Potter.

Also I'm not sure why you're so aghast that I have no kid level response re suicide. I have the response at MY kid's level. She guided me to where she was in her understanding and I answered her questions. There's nothing wrong with that. She understands it is a terrible thing and an awful mistake and waste of life that we would never do. And the people who do it have terrible problems and if she ever thought about it or felt that way to tell us. But that's really unthinkable for you I guess. It's good you're not her parent because it sounds like you would tell her to stop asking questions and that she can't read the books she wants to. Also, I love her just the way she is, so go to hell.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Who said anything about a race? I just want my child to be challenged at school. I don't care if she's ahead of your Karla or not.

It sounds like you are in horse race constantly comparing you DD and her number if awards with other children.

Also, as to our four year old friend, can you accept the idea that not four year olds are the same and some might be gifted?

Of course four-year-olds can be gifted. But there is still a lot of Harry Potter that a four-year-old will miss, simply because a four-year-old is four. What is even the most gifted four-year-old going to make of this paragraph, for example?

"It doesn't mean defeating death in the way the Death Eaters mean it, Harry," said Hermione, her voice gentle. "It means... you know... living beyond death. Living after death."

But they were not living, Harry thought: they were gone. The empty words could not disguise the fact that his parents' mouldering remains lay beneath snow and stone, indifferent, unknowing. And tears came before he could stop them, boiling hot and then instantly freezing on his face, and what was the point in wiping them off, or pretending? He let them fall, his lips pressed hard together, looking down at the thick snow hiding from his eyes the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping under the snow with them.

No offense, but one of my two kids would have had no problem with that at 4. The other one wouldn't get most of it. But one of them totally would. She wouldn't know "mouldering", but other than that, yeah, fine. She's an odd kid (wonderfully), but all the "life after death / nothing after death" stuff was a big issue for her at 4 and the rest of it would have been no problem.

No offense taken. Because. It.simply.is.not.true. "...the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping under the snow with them."

Your four year old understands the decaying of human remains, what happens to souls, having a suicide/death wish? Ah - makes total sense now.

I have no reason to lie about this. IT's true. She totally "got" all of that at 4. Not even "almost 5", but really just 4. I'm not OP and have nothing to prove. I don't care whether you believe me or not, but it's true. My kid is an outlier, for sure. But I'm sure she's not the only one. To be fair, if you knew us (her parents) it would probably surprise you less.

Also, what's with accusing people of lying just because their experience is outside of the norm? Are you the same PP who accused the mom with the kid who skipped a grade of lying? That's so weird. YOu do know that just because something is *unlikely* doesn't mean it's impossible, right?

I'm the poster whose DD skipped 1st grade. With regards the accusation of lying - I was under the impression there's a misanthropic, possibly male, poster who ghosts around all the sites just trying to stir things up a bit and this was some of his work. Its a bore more than anything.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm 38 and don't understand this 100% or have firsthand experience of it. But I can read it. Am I illiterate?

You have 34 more years of life experience than a 4-year-old. You're also probably better at abstract thinking than a 4-year-old.

But if you want to think that a 4-year-old is comprehending Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, go ahead. Clearly this child will be ready for Crime and Punishment by age 5, and If This Is A Man by age 7.

I'm not the 38yo PP (I wish), but I'm perplexed that you can't believe that this is true. It is. There's a vast diversity of humans out there, and some of them are really unusual. One of mine is. Kids who are different don't deserve to have their experiences invalidated or dismissed. They're different. FWIW, I think that one reason she's like that is just genetic -- it's how my DH's parents describe him as a kid too. But part of it is she is/was SUPER inquisitive, about big, adult, philosophical and scientific topics. And we gave her real answers. We tried kid-level answers, but she wouldn't accept them and keep questioning in more and more precise ways until we couldn't blow her off. So she learned the stuff she was interested in. Now, she is absolutely not at that level in other areas (math, social). But when it comes to reading/critical thinking, she's probably ahead of most 10 year olds.
I'm not bragging, fyi. I love my other kid (who's not like this) just as much and think she's just as awesome. Of course my kids are my favorite, but I think all kids are awesome. I've worked with kids a lot, and I just really like kids. If you allow yourself to see them for who they are and not try to fit them in a box of what you think all kids are like, they are really interesting.

If your 4 year old understands suicide, it isn't because she's gifted. The best example I can give is that my child at 4 knew about monocles because we were reading a book about different eyewear. She would appear to have more knowledge than other 4 year olds about monocles at the time, not because she was gifted, but because she had learned about them whereas maybe another 4 year old had learned about eagles or turpentine or gargoyles on that particular day. Your child didn't learn about suicide because she was gifted or inquisitive any more or less than any other kid. Damn shame you feel it was appropriate because you think she was ahead of most 10 year olds. 4 year olds don't have the life experiences to understand Harry Potter. If you gave non-kid level answers about suicide/death wish - well, I got nothing. Just nothing in response.

No, a 4 year old isn't reading Harry Potter and understanding it - but you can tell yourself that. Like I said, it is like nails on a chalkboard when someone says their 4/5 year old is reading Harry Potter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Who said anything about a race? I just want my child to be challenged at school. I don't care if she's ahead of your Karla or not.

It sounds like you are in horse race constantly comparing you DD and her number if awards with other children.

Also, as to our four year old friend, can you accept the idea that not four year olds are the same and some might be gifted?

Of course four-year-olds can be gifted. But there is still a lot of Harry Potter that a four-year-old will miss, simply because a four-year-old is four. What is even the most gifted four-year-old going to make of this paragraph, for example?

"It doesn't mean defeating death in the way the Death Eaters mean it, Harry," said Hermione, her voice gentle. "It means... you know... living beyond death. Living after death."

But they were not living, Harry thought: they were gone. The empty words could not disguise the fact that his parents' mouldering remains lay beneath snow and stone, indifferent, unknowing. And tears came before he could stop them, boiling hot and then instantly freezing on his face, and what was the point in wiping them off, or pretending? He let them fall, his lips pressed hard together, looking down at the thick snow hiding from his eyes the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping under the snow with them.

No offense, but one of my two kids would have had no problem with that at 4. The other one wouldn't get most of it. But one of them totally would. She wouldn't know "mouldering", but other than that, yeah, fine. She's an odd kid (wonderfully), but all the "life after death / nothing after death" stuff was a big issue for her at 4 and the rest of it would have been no problem.

No offense taken. Because. It.simply.is.not.true. "...the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping under the snow with them."

Your four year old understands the decaying of human remains, what happens to souls, having a suicide/death wish? Ah - makes total sense now.

I have no reason to lie about this. IT's true. She totally "got" all of that at 4. Not even "almost 5", but really just 4. I'm not OP and have nothing to prove. I don't care whether you believe me or not, but it's true. My kid is an outlier, for sure. But I'm sure she's not the only one. To be fair, if you knew us (her parents) it would probably surprise you less.

And this: "Excuses, alibis and wild cover-up stories chased each other around Harry's brain, each more feeble than the last."

And this: ""Danger lies before you, while safety lies behind,
Two of us will help you, whichever you would find.
One among us seven will let you move ahead,
Another will transport the drinker back instead,
Two among our numbers hold only nettle wine,
Three of us are killers, waiting hidden in line.
Choose, unless you wish to stay here forevermore,
To help you in your choice, we give you these clues four:
First, however slyly the poison tries to hide
You will always find some on nettle wine's left side;
Second, different are those who stand at either end,
But if you would move onwards, neither is your friend;
Third, as you see clearly, all are different size,
Neither dwarf nor giant holds death in their insides;
Fourth, the second left and the second on the right
Are twins once you taste them, though different at first sight."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm 38 and don't understand this 100% or have firsthand experience of it. But I can read it. Am I illiterate?

You have 34 more years of life experience than a 4-year-old. You're also probably better at abstract thinking than a 4-year-old.

But if you want to think that a 4-year-old is comprehending Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, go ahead. Clearly this child will be ready for Crime and Punishment by age 5, and If This Is A Man by age 7.

I'm not the 38yo PP (I wish), but I'm perplexed that you can't believe that this is true. It is. There's a vast diversity of humans out there, and some of them are really unusual. One of mine is. Kids who are different don't deserve to have their experiences invalidated or dismissed. They're different. FWIW, I think that one reason she's like that is just genetic -- it's how my DH's parents describe him as a kid too. But part of it is she is/was SUPER inquisitive, about big, adult, philosophical and scientific topics. And we gave her real answers. We tried kid-level answers, but she wouldn't accept them and keep questioning in more and more precise ways until we couldn't blow her off. So she learned the stuff she was interested in. Now, she is absolutely not at that level in other areas (math, social). But when it comes to reading/critical thinking, she's probably ahead of most 10 year olds.
I'm not bragging, fyi. I love my other kid (who's not like this) just as much and think she's just as awesome. Of course my kids are my favorite, but I think all kids are awesome. I've worked with kids a lot, and I just really like kids. If you allow yourself to see them for who they are and not try to fit them in a box of what you think all kids are like, they are really interesting.

If your 4 year old understands suicide, it isn't because she's gifted. The best example I can give is that my child at 4 knew about monocles because we were reading a book about different eyewear. She would appear to have more knowledge than other 4 year olds about monocles at the time, not because she was gifted, but because she had learned about them whereas maybe another 4 year old had learned about eagles or turpentine or gargoyles on that particular day. Your child didn't learn about suicide because she was gifted or inquisitive any more or less than any other kid. Damn shame you feel it was appropriate because you think she was ahead of most 10 year olds. 4 year olds don't have the life experiences to understand Harry Potter. If you gave non-kid level answers about suicide/death wish - well, I got nothing. Just nothing in response.

No, a 4 year old isn't reading Harry Potter and understanding it - but you can tell yourself that. Like I said, it is like nails on a chalkboard when someone says their 4/5 year old is reading Harry Potter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Who said anything about a race? I just want my child to be challenged at school. I don't care if she's ahead of your Karla or not.

It sounds like you are in horse race constantly comparing you DD and her number if awards with other children.

Also, as to our four year old friend, can you accept the idea that not four year olds are the same and some might be gifted?

Of course four-year-olds can be gifted. But there is still a lot of Harry Potter that a four-year-old will miss, simply because a four-year-old is four. What is even the most gifted four-year-old going to make of this paragraph, for example?

"It doesn't mean defeating death in the way the Death Eaters mean it, Harry," said Hermione, her voice gentle. "It means... you know... living beyond death. Living after death."

But they were not living, Harry thought: they were gone. The empty words could not disguise the fact that his parents' mouldering remains lay beneath snow and stone, indifferent, unknowing. And tears came before he could stop them, boiling hot and then instantly freezing on his face, and what was the point in wiping them off, or pretending? He let them fall, his lips pressed hard together, looking down at the thick snow hiding from his eyes the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping under the snow with them.

No offense, but one of my two kids would have had no problem with that at 4. The other one wouldn't get most of it. But one of them totally would. She wouldn't know "mouldering", but other than that, yeah, fine. She's an odd kid (wonderfully), but all the "life after death / nothing after death" stuff was a big issue for her at 4 and the rest of it would have been no problem.

No offense taken. Because. It.simply.is.not.true. "...the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping under the snow with them."

Your four year old understands the decaying of human remains, what happens to souls, having a suicide/death wish? Ah - makes total sense now.

I have no reason to lie about this. IT's true. She totally "got" all of that at 4. Not even "almost 5", but really just 4. I'm not OP and have nothing to prove. I don't care whether you believe me or not, but it's true. My kid is an outlier, for sure. But I'm sure she's not the only one. To be fair, if you knew us (her parents) it would probably surprise you less.

Also, what's with accusing people of lying just because their experience is outside of the norm? Are you the same PP who accused the mom with the kid who skipped a grade of lying? That's so weird. YOu do know that just because something is *unlikely* doesn't mean it's impossible, right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Who said anything about a race? I just want my child to be challenged at school. I don't care if she's ahead of your Karla or not.

It sounds like you are in horse race constantly comparing you DD and her number if awards with other children.

Also, as to our four year old friend, can you accept the idea that not four year olds are the same and some might be gifted?

Of course four-year-olds can be gifted. But there is still a lot of Harry Potter that a four-year-old will miss, simply because a four-year-old is four. What is even the most gifted four-year-old going to make of this paragraph, for example?

"It doesn't mean defeating death in the way the Death Eaters mean it, Harry," said Hermione, her voice gentle. "It means... you know... living beyond death. Living after death."

But they were not living, Harry thought: they were gone. The empty words could not disguise the fact that his parents' mouldering remains lay beneath snow and stone, indifferent, unknowing. And tears came before he could stop them, boiling hot and then instantly freezing on his face, and what was the point in wiping them off, or pretending? He let them fall, his lips pressed hard together, looking down at the thick snow hiding from his eyes the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping under the snow with them.

No offense, but one of my two kids would have had no problem with that at 4. The other one wouldn't get most of it. But one of them totally would. She wouldn't know "mouldering", but other than that, yeah, fine. She's an odd kid (wonderfully), but all the "life after death / nothing after death" stuff was a big issue for her at 4 and the rest of it would have been no problem.

No offense taken. Because. It.simply.is.not.true. "...the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping under the snow with them."

Your four year old understands the decaying of human remains, what happens to souls, having a suicide/death wish? Ah - makes total sense now.

I have no reason to lie about this. IT's true. She totally "got" all of that at 4. Not even "almost 5", but really just 4. I'm not OP and have nothing to prove. I don't care whether you believe me or not, but it's true. My kid is an outlier, for sure. But I'm sure she's not the only one. To be fair, if you knew us (her parents) it would probably surprise you less.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm 38 and don't understand this 100% or have firsthand experience of it. But I can read it. Am I illiterate?

You have 34 more years of life experience than a 4-year-old. You're also probably better at abstract thinking than a 4-year-old.

But if you want to think that a 4-year-old is comprehending Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, go ahead. Clearly this child will be ready for Crime and Punishment by age 5, and If This Is A Man by age 7.

I'm not the 38yo PP (I wish), but I'm perplexed that you can't believe that this is true. It is. There's a vast diversity of humans out there, and some of them are really unusual. One of mine is. Kids who are different don't deserve to have their experiences invalidated or dismissed. They're different. FWIW, I think that one reason she's like that is just genetic -- it's how my DH's parents describe him as a kid too. But part of it is she is/was SUPER inquisitive, about big, adult, philosophical and scientific topics. And we gave her real answers. We tried kid-level answers, but she wouldn't accept them and keep questioning in more and more precise ways until we couldn't blow her off. So she learned the stuff she was interested in. Now, she is absolutely not at that level in other areas (math, social). But when it comes to reading/critical thinking, she's probably ahead of most 10 year olds.
I'm not bragging, fyi. I love my other kid (who's not like this) just as much and think she's just as awesome. Of course my kids are my favorite, but I think all kids are awesome. I've worked with kids a lot, and I just really like kids. If you allow yourself to see them for who they are and not try to fit them in a box of what you think all kids are like, they are really interesting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm 38 and don't understand this 100% or have firsthand experience of it. But I can read it. Am I illiterate?

You have 34 more years of life experience than a 4-year-old. You're also probably better at abstract thinking than a 4-year-old.

But if you want to think that a 4-year-old is comprehending Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, go ahead. Clearly this child will be ready for Crime and Punishment by age 5, and If This Is A Man by age 7.

I'm not the 38yo PP (I wish), but I'm perplexed that you can't believe that this is true. It is. There's a vast diversity of humans out there, and some of them are really unusual. One of mine is. Kids who are different don't deserve to have their experiences invalidated or dismissed. They're different. FWIW, I think that one reason she's like that is just genetic -- it's how my DH's parents describe him as a kid too. But part of it is she is/was SUPER inquisitive, about big, adult, philosophical and scientific topics. And we gave her real answers. We tried kid-level answers, but she wouldn't accept them and keep questioning in more and more precise ways until we couldn't blow her off. So she learned the stuff she was interested in. Now, she is absolutely not at that level in other areas (math, social). But when it comes to reading/critical thinking, she's probably ahead of most 10 year olds.
I'm not bragging, fyi. I love my other kid (who's not like this) just as much and think she's just as awesome. Of course my kids are my favorite, but I think all kids are awesome. I've worked with kids a lot, and I just really like kids. If you allow yourself to see them for who they are and not try to fit them in a box of what you think all kids are like, they are really interesting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm 38 and don't understand this 100% or have firsthand experience of it. But I can read it. Am I illiterate?

You have 34 more years of life experience than a 4-year-old. You're also probably better at abstract thinking than a 4-year-old.

But if you want to think that a 4-year-old is comprehending Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, go ahead. Clearly this child will be ready for Crime and Punishment by age 5, and If This Is A Man by age 7.

Anonymous wrote:

I'm 38 and don't understand this 100% or have firsthand experience of it. But I can read it. Am I illiterate?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Who said anything about a race? I just want my child to be challenged at school. I don't care if she's ahead of your Karla or not.

It sounds like you are in horse race constantly comparing you DD and her number if awards with other children.

Also, as to our four year old friend, can you accept the idea that not four year olds are the same and some might be gifted?

Of course four-year-olds can be gifted. But there is still a lot of Harry Potter that a four-year-old will miss, simply because a four-year-old is four. What is even the most gifted four-year-old going to make of this paragraph, for example?

"It doesn't mean defeating death in the way the Death Eaters mean it, Harry," said Hermione, her voice gentle. "It means... you know... living beyond death. Living after death."

But they were not living, Harry thought: they were gone. The empty words could not disguise the fact that his parents' mouldering remains lay beneath snow and stone, indifferent, unknowing. And tears came before he could stop them, boiling hot and then instantly freezing on his face, and what was the point in wiping them off, or pretending? He let them fall, his lips pressed hard together, looking down at the thick snow hiding from his eyes the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping under the snow with them.

No offense, but one of my two kids would have had no problem with that at 4. The other one wouldn't get most of it. But one of them totally would. She wouldn't know "mouldering", but other than that, yeah, fine. She's an odd kid (wonderfully), but all the "life after death / nothing after death" stuff was a big issue for her at 4 and the rest of it would have been no problem.

No offense taken. Because. It.simply.is.not.true. "...the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping under the snow with them."

Your four year old understands the decaying of human remains, what happens to souls, having a suicide/death wish? Ah - makes total sense now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Who said anything about a race? I just want my child to be challenged at school. I don't care if she's ahead of your Karla or not.

It sounds like you are in horse race constantly comparing you DD and her number if awards with other children.

Also, as to our four year old friend, can you accept the idea that not four year olds are the same and some might be gifted?

Of course four-year-olds can be gifted. But there is still a lot of Harry Potter that a four-year-old will miss, simply because a four-year-old is four. What is even the most gifted four-year-old going to make of this paragraph, for example?

"It doesn't mean defeating death in the way the Death Eaters mean it, Harry," said Hermione, her voice gentle. "It means... you know... living beyond death. Living after death."

But they were not living, Harry thought: they were gone. The empty words could not disguise the fact that his parents' mouldering remains lay beneath snow and stone, indifferent, unknowing. And tears came before he could stop them, boiling hot and then instantly freezing on his face, and what was the point in wiping them off, or pretending? He let them fall, his lips pressed hard together, looking down at the thick snow hiding from his eyes the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping under the snow with them.

No offense, but one of my two kids would have had no problem with that at 4. The other one wouldn't get most of it. But one of them totally would. She wouldn't know "mouldering", but other than that, yeah, fine. She's an odd kid (wonderfully), but all the "life after death / nothing after death" stuff was a big issue for her at 4 and the rest of it would have been no problem.

No offense taken. Because. It.simply.is.not.true. "...the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping under the snow with them."

Your four year old understands the decaying of human remains, what happens to souls, having a suicide/death wish? Ah - makes total sense now.

I have no reason to lie about this. IT's true. She totally "got" all of that at 4. Not even "almost 5", but really just 4. I'm not OP and have nothing to prove. I don't care whether you believe me or not, but it's true. My kid is an outlier, for sure. But I'm sure she's not the only one. To be fair, if you knew us (her parents) it would probably surprise you less.